Continuing the evolution vs. creationism debate

Regarding “Santee museum brings creationism to life” (Local, Feb. 3):

Write us

The San Diego Union-Tribune welcomes letters to the editor. Because of the number of letters received, and to allow as many readers as possible to be published, it is the policy of the newspaper to publish no more than one letter from the same author within 120 days. Letters may be edited. It is also our policy to publish letters supporting or opposing a particular issue in a ratio reflecting the number received on each side.

To be considered for publication, a letter must include an address, daytime phone number and, if faxed or mailed, be signed. It may be sent to Letters Editor, The San Diego Union-Tribune, Post Office Box 120191, San Diego, CA 92112-0191, faxed to (619) 260-5081 or e-mailed to
letters@uniontrib.com. Letters submitted may be used in print or in digital form in any publication or service authorized by the Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

Imagine my surprise to see I was reading the local section instead of the religion section. I thought the local section was for news. For those who wish to believe the fairy tales and ignore scientific fact, fine, so be it. Just put it where it belongs, in the religion section. The good news is the “museum” does not have “science” in the name. There's nothing scientific about it.

MARY ANDERSON
San Diego

I agree that empirical evidence should not be ignored, but if you want empirical don't look toward the theory of evolution. If you want to base your view on observable fact then, for example, observe this: The Cambrian period saw the Earth explode with a diversity of life leaving far too little time for macro evolution to work or for life to have evolved from a single common organism. The examples go on and on and are available to all who wish to make an honest investigation.

I take issue with some of the extreme claims made by the Institute for Creation Research and feel it does a poor job of articulating the truth. However, the fact remains that mainstream science is shifting away from any sort of “tree of life” explanation of our creation.

Given the currently available data of experiment and observation, believing in a Darwinistic evolution of our species (or any other species) is just plain embarrassing. Regardless of my personal opinion, our children should be taught the strengths and weaknesses of all theories on creation and origin.

JEFF McANALLY
Ramona

Once again we are forced to confront the embarrassment that is the Museum of Creation and Earth History in Santee, providing an ironic black eye to a region that boasts one of the finest collection of scientists and biotech communities in the world. Stating that the museum “accepts no government funding” underscores the notion that even our anti-science federal government no doubt wishes to distance itself from this monument to anti-intellectualism.

Attempting to assign some credibility with the label “museum” does little to elevate this religious theme park beyond what it is – a testament to lazy thinking. In a transparent display of solipsism, John Morris states that “you cannot convince a kid they came from a fish. Kids know better.” By the same token, I guess it should be obvious that if you just go outside and look up for long enough, it will become clear that the sun revolves around the Earth!

This museum would merely be a humorous example exposing those fringe elements that try to keep our thinking somewhere around the third century if there were not a line to be drawn from here to governmental policies impacting everything from stem cell research to global warming.

The anti-science bias that infects this society is a blight and, left unchecked and unchallenged, will have far-reaching and dangerous implications for the future of this country. Thus, for this evil to prevail, all that is required is for good – and rational – people to do nothing!

GENE ONDRUSEK
San Diego

Even though I greatly disagree with creationism, I visited the Museum of Creation in Santee over 10 years ago and found it to be very fascinating, informative and just plain fun to look at. However, the disagreement I have with creationism is the same for evolution as well.

I can't understand how people can disregard irrefutable evidence, or find it mutually exclusive. The world is not black and white; it is gray, orange and transparent, with multicolored blinking lights.

Creationists are going to have a hard time explaining the over 200 million years' worth of species continuously being discovered that didn't live with us or the dinosaurs. Their existence is literally written in stone. Yet, by the same token, one cannot deny seashells and fossilized fish found on the slopes of our highest mountains and evidence pointing to the existence of a massive wooden ark on Mount Ararat.

To me, locking oneself into a rigid belief system appears to be the greatest hindrance to humanity's physical and spiritual evolution. It's like deciding what the end of the story is after reading only two-thirds of the novel. Humanity is still evolving, and I think all of us all of us are going to be surprised when we reach the last page.

MICHAEL WHITE
San Diego

College loan provider responds to article

As executive vice president of the College Loan Corp., I believe Education Secretary Margaret Spellings is right to focus higher education debate on college access and affordability, but taking money from one government program to pay for another is not going to solve the problem.

Competitive student loan providers have been a vital resource for millions of Americans pursuing higher education, not an obstacle. We compete every day for the right to assist students and families with financing college tuition. That competition has spurred significant investment and innovation, allowing us to deliver better rates, superior service and enhanced financial resources.

Spellings' assertion that competitive loan providers are highly profitable is inaccurate. The truth is we earn less than half a penny per dollar of every loan we provide – the lowest rate of return of any consumer debt product in existence.

Rather than cut funding from the program, which would hurt the very students we should be helping, Spellings and others in the administration and in Congress should focus on addressing the real obstacle to a college degree: soaring tuition that prevents many from even applying. College tuition across the country has risen at double the rate of inflation for over a decade.

Without the means to constrain college tuition increases, providing additional aid to students and families will not improve access and affordability. Worse, encumbering the competitive student loan providers that serve over 80 percent of our nation's student and parent borrowers would reduce the choices and resources available to all families.

JOANNA ACOCELLA
San Diego

Savings and the proposed Powerlink

I was pleased to see the story on the increase in savings estimates for the Sunrise Powerlink (“SDG&E increases savings estimate,” Local, Jan. 31). It's fantastic to see a large infrastructure project that will save money – meaning that the line would pay for itself. We don't see that happen very often.

We live in a fast-growing region that needs new sources of energy to keep up with demand, and supporting a project like the Sunrise Powerlink is a huge benefit to San Diego. My favorite feature is the fact that it would connect to the world's largest solar energy facility in the Imperial Valley. And it would save $220 million each year.

It sure is nice to see money spent wisely in planning for the future – and to see money saved.

GREGORY A. SCHNITZER
San Diego

If SDG&E needs the Sunrise Powerlink so much, let's have the company put it underground. No view loss, no fire hazard, and no access problem if SDG&E puts it under existing highway right of way. This should be done along the whole length of the link – through Anza Borrego State Park and the entire rest of the route.

I can't see why we should sacrifice the park experience, nor should residents of the backcountry have their homes and property despoiled for this project. Too expensive you say? Then maybe the “savings” SDG&E talks about aren't so real.